Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung Acquires Joyent

joyent.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 256 posts

Re: Samsung Acquires Joyent

#101

Post by dawnerd »

ruffrey wrote: post #24

Luckily they did not acquire Node.js edit: I should have been more specific.. when an open source project is under a company's wing and it gets acquired, you don't know what can happen, even under MIT. Look at express recently. Since it's the under the Node Foundation now, this is not a big deal. Had it happened a short time ago, there may have been further turmoil in the community.

Same initial reaction. I can't stand Samsung and refuse to have anything to do with them. All started when they took my 5k dollar tv and started injecting ads and such all while claiming they didn't (this was before the recent media caught on)

Re: Samsung Acquires Joyent

#102

Post by egeozcan »

fhars wrote: post #93
benley wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point being that Samsung give a shit about contributing to open-source projects at all.

The Samsung TV I got came with a pirated copy of linux, which is quite a feat (came with a copy of the GPL 3, which is a clear breach of the GPL 2 only license of linux).

Oh. I thought you could include v2 code in v3 codebases but not vice versa? I may need to go through my projects if that's really not the case.

Re: Samsung Acquires Joyent

#103

Post by lftl »

knurdle wrote: post #74

Hey, maybe Joyent can finally afford to refund the people who supported it when it was textdrive and then went back on their word! Snarky I know but I'm still bitter about how it was all handled..

As a fellow early textdrive supporter, I'm pretty happy with the value I got out of the deal. I'm still using my free strongspace account 10ish years later. I think there was some email about a free hosting account I could theoretically use with some company, but I never looked into it. Honestly, textdrive's hosting was never really of a quality I could use in a professional context anyway. I understand some bitterness, but any "lifetime" deal has to be taken with a pretty big grain of salt, and I'm pretty happy about what I got for the money.

Re: Samsung Acquires Joyent

#104

Post by [deleted] »

bcantrill wrote: post #8

In case anyone's curious, I blogged about the backstory of the acquisition.[1] tl;dr: We at Joyent are elated, and we believe that this will be a huge win for our customers, for our technologies and for the communities that they serve! [1] https://www.joyent.com/blog/samsung-acquires-joyent-a-ctos-p...

[deleted]

Re: Samsung Acquires Joyent

#105

Post by vertex-four »

egeozcan wrote: post #102
fhars wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Samsung TV I got came with a pirated copy of linux, which is quite a feat (came with a copy of the GPL 3, which is a clear breach of the GPL 2 only license of linux).

Oh. I thought you could include v2 code in v3 codebases but not vice versa? I may need to go through my projects if that's really not the case.

Linux has a specific amendment to the GPLv2 stating that it must always be distributed under the terms of the GPLv2, not the GPLv3 or any later version.

Re: Samsung Acquires Joyent

#106

Post by simonebrunozzi »

bcantrill wrote: post #8

In case anyone's curious, I blogged about the backstory of the acquisition.[1] tl;dr: We at Joyent are elated, and we believe that this will be a huge win for our customers, for our technologies and for the communities that they serve! [1] https://www.joyent.com/blog/samsung-acquires-joyent-a-ctos-p...

Congrats! Very smart move by Samsung.

Re: Samsung Acquires Joyent

#108

Post by tokenizerrr »

vertex-four wrote: post #105
egeozcan wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh. I thought you could include v2 code in v3 codebases but not vice versa? I may need to go through my projects if that's really not the case.

Linux has a specific amendment to the GPLv2 stating that it must always be distributed under the terms of the GPLv2, not the GPLv3 or any later version.

Honest question, how is anyone expected to keep up with all of this? Software licenses are not all that interesting to me, I just like making things, but now I have to also read pages and pages of legalize for every single dependency. I thought it would be good enough to know most mainstream licenses, but apparently Linux has a modified version of the GPLv2? I would never notice that, nor would I trust myself to even comprehend it properly.

It's starting to feel like I need to consult a lawyer before I could ever publish an open source project, and that's never going to happen. I'd rather just stop publishing.

Re: Samsung Acquires Joyent

#109

Post by dekz »

cpprototypes wrote: post #4

Samsung is a typical asian electronics company (has a hardware focused history and very good at it, but doesn't understand or respect software). I'm so glad that node.js is not under Joyent control.

How do you come to the conclusion that the entirety of Samsung don't understand or respect software, when they clearly show great contributions to OSS? [0].

[0]: http://linuxcontrib-inn.rhcloud.com/

Post reply on HN